Gait biomechanics of skipping are substantially different than those of running.

UNLABELLED: The inherit injury risk associated with high-impact exercises calls for alternative ways to achieve the benefits of aerobic exercise while minimizing excessive stresses to body tissues. Skipping presents such an alternative, incorporating double support, flight, and single support phases. We used ground reaction forces (GRFs), lower extremity joint torques and powers to compare skipping and running in 20 healthy adults. The two consecutive skipping steps on each limb differed significantly from each other, and from running. Running had the longest step length, the highest peak vertical GRF, peak knee extensor torque, and peak knee negative and positive power and negative and positive work. Skipping had the greater cadence, peak horizontal GRF, peak hip and ankle extensor torques, peak ankle negative power and work, and peak ankle positive power. The second vs first skipping step had the shorter step length, higher cadence, peak horizontal GRF, peak ankle extensor torque, and peak ankle negative power, negative work, and positive power and positive work. The first skipping step utilized predominately net negative joint work (eccentric muscle action) while the second utilized predominately net positive joint work (concentric muscle action). The skipping data further highlight the persistence of net negative work performed at the knee and net positive work performed at the ankle across locomotion gaits. Evidence of step segregation was seen in distribution of the braking and propelling impulses and net work produced across the hip, knee, and ankle joints.

CONCLUSIONS

Skipping was substantially different than running and was temporally and spatially asymmetrical with successive foot falls partitioned into a dominant function, either braking or propelling whereas running had a single, repeated step in which both braking and propelling actions were performed equally.